As we reflect on where we are and ponder resolutions for the coming year, I think of NextGen and some of the subtle, but significant, experiences of the past year. The NextGen we need requires change. Yet, we know change does not come easily. In fact, I have seen a recurring resistance to change.
A quick look back at 2011 reveals lots of activity, some real good, some not so good. I feel compelled to reflect ever so briefly on one of the major happenings towards the end of the year. It was the resignation of Randy Babbitt as Administrator of the FAA. Clearly this took all of us by surprise, and to be sure it was a sad event by all accounts. I believe that many of us could find it in our hearts to forgive most people of a DUI offense, especially if there was no damage done except to the offender. Alas there is zero tolerance for this sort of thing, especially for the Administrator of the FAA. So his departure was a forgone conclusion.
On a recent vacation to Germany, we found ourselves spending a considerable amount of time on the autobahn. Over the years, I have marveled at the interesting differences in cultures, values, thinking patterns, and design. We both have the same problem at hand. A lot of people want to go from point A to point B. We want to allow them to move as quickly, safely, and efficiently as possible. Yet, for some reason, we’ve come up with approaches that seem to be totally different.
For a long time now the talk among most people in the industry I’ve come in contact with has been about globalization, harmony, no borders, blending NextGen with SESAR, in terms of technology, procedures and timing. I believe this is all good stuff, and frankly the right way to go as the world becomes smaller and air travel becomes more affordable and more widely available to so many, especially in developing nations. Recently, I spent time at the US-China Aviation Summit, and clearly that message was foremost on nearly everyone’s agenda. Sure there was lots of talk about their needs as they prepare their country for 4-60 more airports in the next 20 years, and their need for technology and infrastructure, airplanes, crews, and the list goes on, almost limitless. These folks and others who are beginning to see the wisdom in creating and maximizing their aviation industries, are poised to garner every kind of assistance available, whether in terms of experience, or products. There are partnerships all over the world where employment opportunity is available for companies not necessarily headquartered there or not. While I don’t have specific figures, it’s fair to say that even in China, many big and small American companies employ Chinese workers. I suspect this is a solid and rewarding business decision by those long entrenched or by those trying to break into a burgeoning market. I recall the difficulty we at Metron Aviation faced when trying to garner some of the SESAR work early on, and were pretty much told that unless we had a footprint in Europe, it wasn’t likely that we might enjoy some of the business opportunities over there. Yet, there were and continue to be rather large American companies deeply involved in SESAR as the “globalization” rationale continues to be the back beat of the industry’s music. We spend countless hours talking and acting in “collaboration” all around the world, believing that this is the right way to effect change and build the best products and procedures. We include elements from every part of the industry, especially as we move ahead in operational terms. Seeing air traffic controllers, dispatchers, and meteorological types, along with traffic managers, pilots, and airport operators, just to name a nominal group, explore and execute system improvements is very satisfying indeed. It wasn’t that long ago when I was an air traffic controller, that I made decisions for the airlines. I decided who could takeoff and land, with no idea as to the impact to an airlines business model. As we embraced collaborative decision making (CDM), I found it an eye opener and moved to re-establish my role as someone who could afford a slot without necessarily determining who or what aircraft should fill it. Leaving this decision where it best belonged, to the operator. The foundation of Air Traffic Flow Management is now in collaboration, and rightly so. Through those early years of CDM, more and more was learned and shared among industry groups, resulting in a whole new way to conduct business. Putting every stakeholder in a position to both participate in a plans development and eager to execute it. The days of gaming each other were quickly on the decline, and there was a new vigor around how the system would perform.
Continue reading
For people in the US, it’s NextGen. For Europeans, it’s SESAR or Single European Sky. For the Japanese, it’s CARATS. These are the programs by which the air transportation systems of tomorrow will be developed—that is, for the US, Europe and Japan. So, what’s the rest of the world supposed to do?
Recently, ICAO held the Global Air Navigation Industry Symposium (GANIS) in Montreal. The focus of GANIS was driven by ICAO’s Director of the Air Navigation Bureau, Nancy Graham: to unveil the Aviation System Block Upgrade (ASBU) framework to be used by all states to upgrade their air transportation systems. The symposium allowed the community to engage in the process of defining what the ASBUs ultimately should be when the ICAO 12th Air Navigation Conference (ANC/12) convenes in November of 2012. This will be the point at which the member states approve the definition and concept of block upgrades.
There has been some measure of angst around the manner in which the block upgrades were developed so far. They were developed by a small, closed committee of technical experts. The traditional ICAO processes weren’t used. Things were happening too fast. Perhaps they are, but this is signature Nancy Graham. She personifies the motto “Make dust or eat dust.” She hasn’t eaten dust in a long time. Over the years, people have complained about ICAO’s glacial pace. People have said it’s too much like the UN. Well, it is part of the UN. So, why the surprise? Nancy Graham is on a mission to change that. She’s confronted the need to address what happens in the rest of the world. Some have said that the rest of the world could simply follow the lead of the US, Europe or Japan. But, those same people haven’t spent enough time outside the US, Europe and Japan to realize that things are different in other parts of the world. Traffic levels. Pre-existing infrastructure (a blessing and a curse). Power and broadband. Political, institutional and cultural differences. One size doesn’t fit all.
The ICAO plan acknowledges these differences and provides flexibility in implementing the block upgrades depending on the individual state’s “need” and “readiness.” Regardless of the form of block upgrade implementation, however, each state must 1) clearly define measurable operational improvements, 2) install the required ground and airborne equipment with required operational and regulatory approvals, 3) have the standards and procedures for ground and airborne systems, and 4) have a positive business case. ICAO says that if states do this, “a level of investment certainty for operators, infrastructure providers and equipment manufacturers” will result. Sounds simple enough. Except, we haven’t been able to do this very well in the US and Europe.
Let’s take item 1, measurable operational improvements. To define measurable improvements, we have to clearly define the problem we are solving. It’s amazing to me how we seem to launch off on new programs without having a truly clear definition and understanding of the problem that must be solved. We wind up with poor requirements, functionality that isn’t laser-focused on solving the problem, bigger than necessary price tags, and a lack of adequate metrics to measure improvements. Improvement against what?
Let’s take item 4, a positive business case (items 2 and 3 are done as a necessary part of completing item 4). A positive business case requires the present value of future benefits to exceed the present value of all costs. Benefits are essentially dependent on the size of the operational improvements. So, to do item 4, you must go back to item 1. All roads lead from item 1 and circle back to item 1. One of the main reasons we have so much trouble developing a positive business case is that we fail to do an adequate job on defining the operational problem and the associated measurable operational improvements that fix them.
While there is flexibility in the way that ICAO will allow block upgrades to be made in each state, one critical thing to keep in mind is that it’s the same aircraft and crew flying from one state to the next. So, the block upgrades can depend on a state’s specific need and a state’s readiness, but it shouldn’t require aircraft to carry different sets of equipment or crews to use different sets of procedures when flying from state to state. To the extent that the aircraft and crew can be relied upon to do more, the need for ground-based infrastructure and workforce will be reduced. It’s also naturally faster to do technology insertion and workforce implementation on the airborne end than it is on the ground, particularly when thinking about this on a global scale. There’s a lot of money and time to be saved.
As we embark on a long overdue plan to upgrade the global air transportation system beyond just the US, Europe and Japan, let’s use a balanced approach that doesn’t over-emphasize the ground-based portion of block upgrades. If anything, we ought to place more emphasis on the airborne end. Let’s not over-emphasize the block upgrades themselves and lose sight of the fundamental problems that need to be solved. Even before block upgrades were uttered, there had been insufficient attention given to defining and understanding operational problems. When we seek to more clearly define and truly understand the operational problems we face, we likely will find that there are creative ways of solving good portions of those problems quickly and inexpensively.
I did not know quite to expect at this year’s Paris Air Show at Le Bourget. By many accounts, this is one of aviation’s top events, where large aircraft orders are announced and the latest advances in aviation technology are on display. Metron Aviation was part of the Alternative Aviation Fuels Showcase (http://www.alt.parisairshow.com/), a display featuring over a dozen alternative fuel producers and other organizations representing different parts of the supply chain. Collectively, we were not selling aircraft or maintenance services or any of the other traditional offerings at this kind of events. What we were demonstrating was that aviation alternative fuels have arrived.
Part of the proof came, literally, with the arrival of a number of flights using alternative jet fuels. One of the flights was with a business jet that followed a route similar to that used by Charles Lindbergh for his famous flight of 1927. This flight used a 50/50 blend of conventional and camelina-based alternative fuel.
Another sign that this industry is gaining momentum was manifested by the multiple pathways to alternative jet fuel represented at the Showcase. It was fascinating to see the different approaches that companies are taking to produce these fuels, whether using known feedstocks in new ways, developing alternative feedstocks, processing technologies, micro-organisms, or all sorts of combinations of the above. It is not yet clear that there will be one winning pathway that will dominate the industry. The answer will depend very much on local conditions for the production of feedstocks and the fuel itself and, therefore, it is good to have many options available. I hope all of the participants at the Showcase (and more) will become major producers of alternative fuels – we will need all of it to satisfy the needs of the industry in years to come.
The Showcase attracted a lot attention from high-ranking officials from expected and unexpected corners. U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood and FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt spend almost an hour touring the display and talking with each one of the companies represented.
Furthermore, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack also spent about an hour at the Showcase. I was told this was the first time a U.S. Secretary of Agriculture made an official visit to the Paris Air Show. This highlighted the fact that alternative fuels have the potential to not only provide benefits to the airline industry but also to support many other sectors of the economy in the U.S. and around the world. Secretary Vilsack mentioned how alternative fuels are a key to promoting jobs and economic development especially in rural areas. It is amazing that such a high tech industry like aviation can have a direct positive impact on more traditional sectors like agriculture. (In this context, it is also appropriate to point out that not all alternative fuels are created equal and that there are multiple effects that need to be considered when evaluating these fuels – this is an enormous topic by itself and one that we will talk about in a future posting).
At Metron Aviation, we see our contribution to alternative fuels in terms of analytical know-how and tools to help stakeholders identify opportunities, evaluate availability of alternative fuels, and assess project readiness and implementation. We provide knowledge and expertise to help put together the rationale for investing and supporting alternative fuel projects. We take a wide perspective and consider the entire supply chain, from feedstock producers to fuel producers to airline buyers, as we see these projects as requiring collaboration among all interested parties to succeed. The Alternative Fuel Showcase at the Paris Air Show showed that this industry is united in the approach it is taking and that collectively we are all working to help each other succeed. We see ourselves as enablers of this process and contributors to the growth of this industry. There is certainly much more work to come and I look forward to the next steps in this exciting field!
As economies develop and our world becomes more interconnected, the need for air transportation increases. As aviation activity grows, so does its environmental footprint. The aviation industry has historically taken decisive action to reduce fuel consumption, noise, and other environmental impacts with great success. Recognizing that we need to continue pushing the envelope to minimize our environmental footprint as we grow, the industry has set ambitious goals to meet this responsibility. This is exemplified in the targets set by IATA for the coming decades:
- 1.5% average annual improvement in fuel efficiency between now and 2020
- Carbon-neutral growth by 2020
- 50% absolute reduction in aviation emissions by 2050 compared with 2005
Alternative fuels are becoming a key component in how aviation can reduce its environmental footprint. While practically unheard of just a few years ago, the aviation alternative fuel industry has come a long way in a few years. There have been numerous flight tests by the military and airlines around the world proving the viability of alternative fuels made with different feedstocks and production processes. In addition, standards for alternative fuels made from plant oils for use on aircraft have just been approved. Metron Aviation has been developing analytical tools to help airlines, airports, producers, and other stakeholders evaluate alternative fuel projects along the entire supply chain. These tools are intended to provide guidance as to the many options that may become available and to help project developers move from planning to implementation and make alternative fuels a reality.
The Paris Air Show will open on June 20th, 2011 at LeBourget. Recognizing the increasing importance of alternative fuels, the organizers have created an Alternative Aviation Fuels Showcase as a central defining theme of the entire show. The Showcase will bring together numerous producers, airlines, and other stakeholders to talk about past accomplishments, current challenges, and future opportunities. Metron Aviation will be part of the Showcase, demonstrating our tools and capabilities to help stakeholders evaluate and implement alternative fuel opportunities. We will also be blogging directly from the Paris Air Show and relaying all the exciting news and happenings. Minimizing the environmental impact of aviation will not be easy but we are up to the challenge. Stay tuned.
A little over a year after the Eyjafjallajökull eruption, we have another eruption in Iceland causing air transportation disruptions in Europe. Grímsvötn erupted on May 21, but relatively briefly. Although ash emissions slowed after a couple of days, the ash plume was propelled above FL600. The ash clouds moved predominantly to the north and northeast. But, portions of the ash cloud traveled toward the British Isles and Scandinavia, and eventually to parts of Central Europe. As of this writing about 1200 flights have been canceled.
Ever since I can remember, when it comes to measuring the performance of the nation’s air transportation system, the aviation community has focused on safety, capacity, and delays. These have been the primary yardsticks of performance. The legislation that created the FAA cites safety and efficiency as its primary mission, but efficiency is difficult to measure, so efficiency was translated into capacity. It turns out that capacity is hard to deal with as well, so delays became the surrogate for efficiency and capacity. Even important parameters like fuel, crew and equipment costs largely were measured based on impacts due to delays.
A Dedication occurred on Saturday April 9, with the newly built David J. Hurley Air Traffic Control System Command Center (ATCSCC), on the same property as the Potomac TRACON in Vint Hill, Va. I had more than a passing interest in this activity, and felt fortunate to have been invited. I saw many who worked with me in the business of Air Traffic Flow Management (ATFM), including a number of visionaries who preceded me, providing a solid foundation upon which I was able to continue their work. Of course the very name of the facility recognizes the greatest of visionaries, Dave Hurley. I was fortunate, very fortunate, to have had his guidance and counsel for several years prior to his passing. What’s more, I worked in the Command Center he built for over a decade, the predecessor to the new building. I clearly had mixed emotions about changing the center, but I’m certain that it’s mission will continue, ever forward looking, through this summer season, and all those that follow right into NextGen, whenever we might say we crossed the line from today’s system into something we might all agree is NextGen worthy. Clearly Traffic Flow Management is at the heart of NextGen, and this new building represents an administration commitment to that. New technologies and increased collaboration at all stakeholder levels will certainly continue to afford us a global leadership role.
